8/11/2019 UNHSC

1/29

8/11/2019 UNHSC

2/29

NOTE FROM THE EXECUTIVE BOARD

Dear delegates,

Welcome! Its ourpleasure to welcome you to the Historic Security Council at

SAI MUN 2013. My name is Shazeeb M Khairul Islam and Im going to serve

as your Chairperson for this session and Ill be joined by Sowdamini Pogaru

who will be serving as the Vice Chairperson. We are both available at any timeto answer any queries or put to rest any concerns that you may have regarding

the council.

Firstly, a little about myself; for those who dont know Im currently pursuing

a MBA Degree at University of Dhaka. I have been associated with 11 ModelUnited Nations and this is for the first time I will be chairing in an International

Model United Nations. I am very excited to meet you all. I will make sure MUN

is fun when it is SAIMUN.

And our Vice Chairperson, Sowdamini Pogaru is delighted to have you all atSAIMUN 2014. She assures you, delegates, that it is a MUN that stays in your

memory no matter what and that youve made the right choice by choosing to

attend.

As for council, Ill deal with certain obvious questions right now. For the sake

of the environment, laptops will be allowed in council though Id greatly

appreciate it if your nose wasnt buried in it the entire time. The use of internet,

need I say it, is strictly forbidden inside council and any infringement of thisrule will have dire consequences. The proof you need to submit when it comes

to the validity of any claim is in this order of priority: Reuters reports> UNreports> Government reports.

Also delegates, try to broaden your minds somewhat with this council. It is true

that we are bound by time restraints and certain occurrences but we also have

the power of hindsight and retrospect to aid us so it would be brilliant to see you

change the course of history. However, it is equally crucial to remember the

setting in which you find yourself. The freeze date is June 4th, 1967. How thecouncilproceeds, well, youll see that once were in our council room. The

8/11/2019 UNHSC

3/29

geopolitical scene was vastly different from what we see today and it will be

important to take all of these changes into account if we are to simulate this

council successfully.

I hope youll all arrive well researched and excited to enter three days of

dynamic debating, name calling and various other tantrums that well witnessbefore our time together is done. Were greatly looking forward to seeing youall in July.

Cheers!

Executive Board.

8/11/2019 UNHSC

4/29

HISTORY OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is the organ of the UnitedNations charged with the maintenance of international peace and security. Its

powers, outlined in the United Nations Charter, include the establishment of

peacekeeping operations, the establishment of international sanctions regimes,

and the authorization for military action. Its powers are exercised through

United Nations Security Council Resolutions.

Under Chapter Six of the Charter, "Pacific Settlement of Disputes", the SecurityCouncil "may investigate any dispute or any situation which might lead to

international friction or give rise to a dispute". The Council may "recommend

appropriate procedures or methods of adjustment" if it determines that the

situation might endanger international peace and security. These

recommendations are not binding on UN members.

Under Chapter Seven, the Council has broader power to decide what measures

are to be taken in situations involving "threats to the peace, breaches of the

peace, or acts of aggression". In such situations, the Council is not limited to

recommendations but may take action, including the use of armed force "tomaintain or restore international peace and security". This was the basis for

UN armed action in Korea in 1950 during the Korean War. Decisions taken

under Chapter Seven, such as economic sanctions, are binding on UN members.

The Security Council held its first session on 17 January 1946 at Church House,

London.

Though the council has met at many locations since its first meeting, the seat of

the UNSC is at the UN headquarters in New York City, where the Security

Council members are always present so they can meet at any time to deal withany crisis. The basic structure of the UNSC is set out in Chapter V of the UN

Charter. The role of president of the Security Council involves setting the

agenda, presiding at its meetings and overseeing any crisis. It rotates in

alphabetical order of the Security Council member nations' names in English.

There are two categories of membership in the UN Security Council: permanent

members and elected members. The Council seated five permanent members

who were originally drawn from the victorious powers after World War II:

The Republic of China

8/11/2019 UNHSC

5/29

The French Republic

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

The United States of America

It is significant to note that at the time of the Six Day War, Chinas interestswere represented by the Republic of China not the Peoples Republic of China,which didnt take its seat in the SCuntil 1971.

The Russias interests, of course, were represented by the USSR, not the

Russian Federation, which didnt take its seat in theSC until 1991.

These were two of the three times when the SCs composition has changed, thefirst and most important one being in 1965 when amendments to articles 23 and

27 came into effect to increase the number of elected members from six to ten.

Under Article 27 of the UN Charter, Security Council decisions on all

substantive matters require the affirmative votes of nine members. A negative

vote, or veto, by a permanent member prevents adoption of a proposal, even if ithas received the required number of affirmative votes.

Abstention is not regarded as a veto despite the wording of the Charter.

A state that is a member of the UN, but not of the Security Council, mayparticipate in Security Council discussions in matters by which the Council

agrees that the country's interests are particularly affected. In recent years, the

Council has interpreted this loosely, enabling many countries to take part in its

discussions or not depending on how they interpret the validity of the

country's interest. Non-members are routinely invited to take part when they are

parties to disputes being considered by the Council.

8/11/2019 UNHSC

6/29

BACKGROUND ON THE SIX DAY WAR

History is witness to the frequent wars that have been waged over the territory

of Palestine whose ownership has passed from the First Jews to the Assyrians,the Babylonians, the Persians, the Romans and finally the Turks.

However, despite all the strife in the region, the Jews never gave up their hope

of the Promised Land, which they believed was their ancient homeland givento them by God. They continued to migrate there in small numbers. Palestine

remained central to Jewish culture and worship even if it wasnt theirs. Thus, a

century ago the Jews never even dreamt of actually establishing their homeland

there. The Jewish connection was mostly messianic redemption and a vague

notion of deliverance.

When AntiSemitism took a violent streak (at about the end of the 19th century)a large number of Jews had left their earlier places of stay and had migratedelsewhere. It was during this time, in the year 1914, that the concept of Israel

actually evolved. This was strongly promoted by men such as Theodor Herzel a

leading proponent of the Zionist movement.

Arab rights over Palestine arise from the fact that they were the last conquerors

of Palestine (albeit under the aeges of the Turkish Empire which had absorbed

most Arab lands). Thus by 1914, two rival groups had settled in Palestine with

each of them beginning to view the territory as their homeland. The Arabic

population had been estimated to be around 650,000 and the Jews at 85,000 (a

minority that would become significant in the years to come).

In the sunny year of 1915, a series of letters were exchanged between the then

Sharif of Mecca and Sir Henry McMahon, the British High Commissioner inEgypt. The subject of the letters was the future division of the Ottoman Empire

territories with regard to the Arab land. These were later known as the

HusseinMcMahoncorrespondences. The Turks had just allied with Germany in

the First World War and the British were looking for help from the Arabs to

topple them. Hussein demanded land for the Arabs where they could form theirown independent nations. McMahon responded in kind stating that, after the

War would get over, their demands would be met, subject to certain conditions.It is this that forms the basis of Arabic argument for Palestine.

However, when through the Balfour Declaration Britain supported the

establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, the Arabs cried foul. The

British countered by saying that they had not included the territory of Palestinein the correspondence. The Arabs had no choice but to accept the rising influx

of Jewish people into Palestine (this was the time when the idea of Israel was

gaining popularity among Jews).

Earlier in 1916, the French and the British had made secret plans for dividing

the Ottoman Empire after the First World War for their own benefit. This wasknown as the SykesPicotAgreement. When this came to light, it further

8/11/2019 UNHSC

7/29

deteriorated the image of Britain. The Arabs were particularly angered with this

because they considered this in direct violation of the Hussein McMahon

correspondence. Many historians consider this the turning point of ArabWestern

relations.

The Palestine problem became an international issue towards the end of theFirst World War with the disintegration of the Turkish Ottoman Empire. TheLeague of Nations was established at a historic meeting in the French suburb of

Versailles. Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations established the

Mandates system and the area of Palestine, promised to both the Jews and the

Arabs by the British were eventually returned to the British.

The primary aim of the Mandates system was to facilitate the movementtowards freedom of the Mandatory Territories, and, as expected all but one

achieved their goal. The exception was Palestine. Instead of being limited to

"the rendering of administrative assistance and advice" the Mandate had as a

primary objective the implementation of the "Balfour Declaration" issued by the

British Government in 1917, expressing support for "the establishment in

Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people".

The period between the two World Wars was one of unrest, violence and

hostility. Arabic and Jewish communities openly fought against each other and

between the years of 193639 a massive Arabic rebellion took place against the

British. The extremist Jews too were frustrated with Britains doublestandards

and targeted the British. Inter communal fighting broke out with Arabs targeting

Jews and the Jews forming a Jewish Defense Force. Despite the upheavals and

increasingly fragile political situation, the British continued to try to find asolution.

However each of their proposed solutions either managed to anger one or other

of the conflicting sides or made no difference at all. Adding to all this was the

everincreasing influx of Jewish immigrants trying to escape Nazi persecution ina war-torn Europe, which only worsened the situation.

By 1947, Britain decided it had had enough. It abruptly decided to hand over the

problem to the newly formed United Nations. The UNO decided to partition the

land of Palestine into two nations, one Jewish and the other Arabic. The Arabs

rejected the idea because they were given lesser territory despite being themajority. On the last day of the mandate, that fateful day of May 15, 1948,

Israel declared its independence.

ISRAELI INDEPENDENCEImmediately after this proclamation, Israel was attacked by five Arab

countriesLebanon, Syria, Transjordan, Egypt and Iraq. Despite the nascent

nature of the State of Israel, it managed to win a resounding victory against all

five nations and captured more territory than what was originally allocated tothem. The Arabs were humiliated.

8/11/2019 UNHSC

8/29

The Israeli victory and the establishment of a Jewish state did not put a rest to

the Palestinian issue. A colossal amount of Arab Palestinians (estimated at

about 726,000) fled Israel to form refugee camps in the neighboring countries.

The refugee crisis exists to the present day. Further, these camps became centers

for antiIsraeli movements and recruitment of fighters.Egypt, Jordan and Syria, as well as Iraq and other Arab states (for the most partthe same as those who fought in the first Arab-Israeli war of 1948) were

however not willing to give up on Palestine so easily.

Rhetoric in the days leading up to the Six-Day War echoed that from 1948. For

example, on May 15, 1948, the day Arab states launched their attack on Israel,

Arab League Secretary General Azzam Pasha announced that "[t]his will be awar of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like

the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades." Almost exactly nineteen years

later, on May 18, 1967, Egypts government-controlled Voice of the Arabs

radio station mimicked this language, announcing that "the sole method we shall

apply against Israel is total war, which will result in the extermination of Zionist

existence." Two days later, Syrian Defense Minister Hafez Assad declared: "I,

as a military man, believe that the time has come to enter into a battle of

annihilation."

Another of the central factors that pushed the region to war other than the

animosity over the territory of Palestine, the status of international waterways

leading to Israel also had its roots in the decades before 1967. In the late 1940s

and early 1950s, Egypt blockaded the Suez Canal and the Straits of Tiran to

shipping destined for Israel. These restrictions not only harmed the nascentJewish state, but were considered a violation of the 1949 armistice resolution

signed by Egypt and Israel, the Constantinople Convention of 1888, Security

Council Resolution 95, and, in the words of historian Howard Sachar,

"international legal precedents for gulfs and bays flanked by the territories ofmore than one littoral state".

It wasnt until 1956 after Israel, France and the United Kingdom invaded and

then quickly withdrew from Egypts Sinai peninsula that passage through the

Straits of Tiran (but not the Suez Canal) was opened to Israeli shipping. The

presence of a United Nations Emergency Force stationed in the Sinai between1956 and 1967 helped deter Egypt from re-imposing its blockade.

By the summer of 1967, however, the UN troops would be gone, old threats and

blockades would reappear, and the drift to war would reach its climax.

Yet, though the antagonism of earlier fighting remained firmly in the

background, war was hardly expected or pre-planned. Before 1964 there was, in

the words of Mideast scholar Nadav Safran, "eight years of nearly perfect

quiescence of the Arab-Israeli conflict"despite the unwavering Arab positionthat Israel must be destroyed. Even after 1964, when attacks against Israel by

the Palestinian Fatah organization and skirmishes along the Israeli-Syrian

8/11/2019 UNHSC

9/29

border occurred with increasing regularity, neither Israel nor its neighbors

(excepting maybe Syria) were itching to rush to war.

But this all changed in May 1967. The deterioration was rooted in several

factors, not the least of which was geopolitics of the Cold War. As American

relations with Egypt soured, the Soviet Union stepped up its influence in theArab world, working to build (pro-Soviet) Arab unity by focusing Arabattention on their common enemy, Israel. The prospect of fighting against

America had a deterrent effect on Egyptian President Gamal Nasser, just as fear

of the Soviet Union weighed on Israeli Prime Minister Levi Eshkol.

But as the weight of the Soviets shifted more firmly behind the Arabs' anti-

Israel positions, an emboldened Nasser moved to reclaim Egypt's position asleader of the Arab worlda position that had eroded in part because of the

Nasser's stance that the Arabs should hold off on outright confrontation with

Israel until the Arab world could successfully marshal its collective resources

against the Jewish state. Any show of military strength against Israel, then,

would help the Egyptian president regain his lost stature. The atmosphere in the

spring of 1967 convinced Nasser that the time was ripe to flex his muscles.

In the spring of 1967, tensions between Syria and Israel ran high, with

flashpoints including terrorist raids against Israel originating from Syria and the

Syrian diversion of water from the Jordan River. Following an attack on the

water pump at Kibbutz Misgav Am, Israeli Prime Minister and Defense

Minister Levi Eshkol resolved that after the next act of belligerence, Israel

would position armored tractors deep into the demilitarized zones, wait to be

hit, and then fire back. The plan went into effect accordingly and resulted in alarge-scale dogfight on April 7 over Syrian skies, in which the Israeli Air Force

shot down several Syrian planes. In the next month, Fatah, the Palestinian

terrorist organization, launched more than a dozen attacks on Israel and planted

mines and explosives on Israel's borders with Syria, Jordan and Lebanon. OnMay 5, violence escalated as Palestinian fighters shelled Kibbutz Manara. All

the while, Israel continued with its forays into the demilitarized zones and Israel

launched a diplomatic campaign to set the groundwork for retaliation.

An Israeli appeal to United Nations Secretary General U Thant led to

unprecedented UN censure of the Arabs. On May 11, U Thant condemned theArab attacks; but a proposed Security Council debate on the matter was derailed

by Soviet obstructionism. The United States, meanwhile, refused Israel's request

for tanks and jets and suggested that its naval fleet in the region would remain

neutral in case of war. Israeli statements about answering Syrian aggression

were reported in the international press and goaded additional Syrian backing of

Fatah operations.

SOVIET MEDDLING

In mid-May, Soviet meddling severely escalated the brewing conflict. On May15, Israel Independence Day, plans for a parade involving large numbers of

8/11/2019 UNHSC

10/29

Israeli troops in western Jerusalem drew outrage in Arab countries. Wishing to

defuse the situation, Eshkol forbade bringing heavy weapons into the capital.

This decision was used by the Soviets to stoke tensions; on May 15, Anwar al-

Sadat, then speaker of the National Assembly, visited Moscow, where he was

warned (falsely) by the Soviets that Israel was planning to invade Syriasometime between the dates of May 16 and May 22. The Soviets cited theabsence of weapons in the Jerusalem parade as proof that the Israelis were

preparing for war and falsely claimed that Israel was massing brigades along its

northern border with Syria.

Syria also quickly passed the disinformation to Egypt's President Nasser, who

on May 14 declared a state of emergency and made a show of parading histroops through Cairo on their way to Sinai. During this period, Arab leaders and

the media spoke daily of eliminating Israel.

CLAIMS OF ISRAELI TROOP BUILDUP DEBUNKED BUT

EVIDENCE IGNOREDOn May 14, Gen. Muhammad Fawzi, the Egyptian chief of the general staff,

visited Damascus and toured the Syrian border with Israel, where he saw no

Israeli troop buildup. Fawzi's findings, which were confirmed by the chief of

Egypt's military intelligence, the U.S. embassy in Cairo, and the CIA, wereshared with Nasser, who nevertheless decided to proceed in his menacing troop

buildups.

In response to the Egyptian troop buildup, Eshkol put the army on a first-levelalert and authorized the placement of several tank companies in the south.

Reluctant to send a message that Israel was eager for war, he did not call up the

reservists. Israeli diplomats went into service on all frontsinviting UNObserver Odd Bull to the north to confirm troops were not gathered there,

seeking to relay to Egypt that Israel was not interested in war, and sending

international warnings about the gravity of Egypt's actions.

Between the nights of May 15 and 16, the Egyptian and Palestinian troop

presence in the Sinai tripled. On May 17, Egyptian planes entered Israeliairspace to carry out an unprecedented reconnaissance of Israel's nuclear reactor

in Dimona, prompting the Israelis to heighten the alert of their army and air

force. Syria announced that its forces were deployed in the Golan Heights.

Israeli Chief of Staff Yitzhak Rabin called up 18,000 troops and ordered the

laying of mines along parts of the Egyptian border. General Murtagi, the

Egyptian Commander of forces in the Sinai, declared an Order of the Day,which was broadcasted on Cairo Radio May 18: "The Egyptian forces have

taken up positions in accordance with our predetermined plans. The morale of

our armed forces is very high, for this is the day they have so long been waiting

for, for this holy war."

8/11/2019 UNHSC

11/29

EGYPT EVICTS UN FORCESIn the evening of May 16, Egypt presented the United Nations EmergencyForce, which had been deployed in the Sinai Peninsula and Gaza Strip to

discourage hostilities between Egypt and Israel, with a demand to withdraw

from key locations. Without consulting with the General Assembly, as requiredby a commitment made in the UN in 1957, UN Secretary General U Thant

decided to withdraw all of the UN forces. By May 19, UNEF officersrelinquished their posts to the Egyptians and the Palestine Liberation Army.

The Americans again rebuffed Israeli diplomatic appeals, refusing to approve

any preemptive actions, provide assurances regarding Israeli security or transfer

tanks and jets Israel had requested. Efforts to obtain from France and the United

Kingdom expressions of support for Israel's security similarly failed. By May20, Israel had called up 80,000 reservists.

STRAITS OF TIRAN CLOSEDOn May 22, Egypt blocked the Strait of Tiran to Israeli shipping for the first

time since the 1956 war, an act of war under international law. (Israel had long

made clear that blocking the Israeli port of Eilat was cause for war.) Nasser's

decision to close the strait set off activity across the Arab world. Lebanon,

Kuwait and Saudi Arabia all activated their militaries. Iraqi troopsreportedly approached the Syrian and Jordanian borders while Jordan moved

tanks towards the West Bank.

U.S. REJECTS ISRAELI APPEALSUp north, the Syrians blocked UN observers from reaching a critical road and

began pouring troops into Golan Heights. At that point, the Israelis received a

message from President Lyndon Johnson stating that they should not initiate fireor take any action without first consulting with the United States. Eshkol

therefore argued against entering into war at that time, and on May 23 the

government agreed to accept an American proposal in which the U.S. would

weigh the possibility a multinational escort of Israeli ships through Tiran (in the

wake of the 1956 war, the United States had committed itself to guaranteeingIsrael's access to the Straits of Tiran).

That night, Chief of Staff Rabin, suffering from anxiety, pressure, exhaustion,

depression and perhaps nicotine poisoning, secretly withdrew from his duties

for a two day period. His operations chief, Ezer Weizman, filled in for him and

expanded upon Rabin's limited war plan with a more aggressive plan called

Operation Axe.

However, Eshkol did not approve the operation, as foreign minister Abba Eban

was in the middle of what proved to be an unsuccessful diplomatic campaign in

France, Britain and the United States, where he asked for an American

commitment that any attack on Israel would be equivalent to an attack on the

8/11/2019 UNHSC

12/29

U.S. Although Johnson had condemned the blocking of Tiran as "illegal" and

"potentially disastrous to the cause of peace," and sent word to Egypt that its

aggression would meet "gravest international consequences," he nevertheless

held firm in his opposition to unilateral Israeli action. The French and Soviets

also warned Israel against starting a war.

OPERATION DAWNEgyptian Field Marshal Abd al-Hakim Amer, a onetime close confidant of

Nasser whose growing power eventually came to threaten the president, was

largely able to wrest control of the country's armed forces from the Supreme

Headquarters. He developed a war plan, called "Dawn," whose goal

capturing the whole Negev desertfar exceeded the more limited plan toisolate Eilat and bomb specified targets. Nasser didn't intervene with Amer's

orders, despite the fact that they wrought chaos among the poorly-equippedtroops pouring into Sinai, and contradicted Egypt's longstanding three-pronged

defense strategy, dubbed "Conqueror."

In a tense meeting of Israeli leadership, Eshkol agreed to call up the remaining

reservists, though he and Rabin again decided against going to war in favor of

waiting for positive results to Eban's ongoing diplomacy trip. In France, Ebanreceived a stern warning from Prime Minister Charles de Gaulle to refrain from

attacking Egypt. Britain's response was less hostile and included promises to try

to bring an end to the blockade.

THE AMERICAN ROLEStarting on May 24, the U.S., for its part, attempted to sell the Israelis on the

"Regatta" plan, which involved an international convoy affirming free passagethrough the Straits of Tiran. Within two days, international enthusiasm for the

plan waned, but the Americans withheld this discouraging information from the

Israelis.

Furthermore, the plan to ensure free passage seemed irrelevant by May 25,

when Eban, then in Washington, received a cable from Jerusalem emphasizingthat Israel faced an existential danger. "An all-out Egyptian-Syrian attack is

imminent and could occur at any moment," it read. Eban, however, at times

downplayed the Egyptian threat in discussions with American statesmen, much

to the consternation of his colleagues in Israel.

Perhaps soothed by Eban, Washington initially stalled on providing any direct

guarantees or commitments, and continued to promise progress regarding aninternational convoy. Johnson appears to have hoped that, by stringing the

Israelis along, he could buy time to either solve the situation via the United

Nations or possibly convince the Israelis to agree to the placement of UNEF on

their territory, an unthinkable option to Israel. On May 26, Eban met with

Johnson, who said the U.S. "will support a plan to use any or all measures to

8/11/2019 UNHSC

13/29

open the straits." At the same time, Johnson continued to warn against Israel

taking preemptive action.

Eban returned to Israel and joined a strongly polarized Cabinet debate about

whether or not to strike preemptively. During the meeting, communications

from Johnson and Secretary of State Dean Rusk reiterated the Americancommitment to opening the Straits as well as U.S. opposition to an Israeliattack. The Israelis decided to keep their army mobilized but to hold off on war

so as to give the Americans an opportunity to work their diplomacy.

The strain on the Israeli leadership was tremendous. A May 28 radio address, in

which an exhausted Eshkol bumbled through a speech about the choice to rely

on American diplomacy, left the nation in a state of panic. The army had beenbiding time until Eban's return, developing various contingency plans, but

keeping everything on hold, resulting in confused troop movements in the

Negev desert. Concerned about the deteriorating situation, army commanders

were furious at the government's decision to withhold from war. The public

responded similarly, expressing impatience for formation of a national unity

government and preparing itself for war.

THE SOVIET POSITIONIn Moscow, the Egyptians sought to clarify the Soviet position in case of war,

and like the Israelis vis-a-vis the United States, received an ambiguous

response. The Soviet ambassador in Cairo informed Nasser about a cable sent

from Washington containing a warning of an imminent Egyptian attack and

urged Nasser not to strike. As a result, Operation Dawn was called off.Although some in the Soviet Union had urged caution, Shams Badran, the

Egyptian defense minister, returned from Moscow with the message that the

Soviets would stand by the Egyptians in battle.

THE DEFENSE PACTOn May 30, King Hussein of Jordan and Nasser signed a mutual defense pact in

which Egypt gained joint command of the Jordanian army. Iraq joined amilitary alliance with Syria, Egypt and Jordan. In the context of the pact, Jordan

permitted the reopening of PLO offices in Amman and essentially relinquished

control of its army to the Egyptians, who transferred two Egyptian battalions to

Jordanian territory. By this point, Israel was surrounded by some 500,000

troops, more than 5,000 tanks, and almost 1,000 fighter planes.

Alarmed by this development and succumbing to public pressure, Eshkolstepped down as defense minister on June 1 and named popular war hero Moshe

Dayan as a replacement, which buoyed public spirit. Eshkol also formed a

national unity government, appointing Menachem Begin minister without

portfolio.

8/11/2019 UNHSC

14/29

In the first several of days of June, the Israeli government began to receive

signals from the Americans that the U.S. no longer opposed a preemptive strike,

and Dayan oversaw final preparations of Israel's war plan.

ARAB PREPARATIONSAs for the Egyptians, their troops continued to pour into Sinai. Despite some

disorganization, shortages and exhaustion among his forces, Nasser was sure ofvictory. On the Jordanian front, battalions from the Arab Legion, under the

control of Egyptian General 'Abd al-Mun'im Riyad, were largely spread out

across West Bank Palestinian villages instead of being concentrated in more

strategically important locales.

Confident of victory, the Jordanians resolved to cut off western Jerusalem byattacking Israeli positions in the north and south of the city at the start of the

fighting. As for Syria, it failed to coordinate with Egypt despite their defensepact. Like the Jordanians, the Syrians adopted ambitious war plans, opting for

an offensive operation as opposed to a more limited plan to fend off Israeli

attacks on the Golan Heights. Morocco, Libya, Saudi Arabia and Tunisia all

sent troops to the Sinai. With the Arab nations united like never before, Arab oil

companies pledged to boycott any country that supported Israel and Nasserthreatened to close the Suez Canal. The Soviets, too, lent a hand of support by

way of 10 warships which arrived in the eastern Mediterranean.

ISRAEL DECIDESIn the weeks leading up to the Six Day War, Arab leaders repeatedly threatenedIsrael with annihilation. Together with Egypt's ejection of United Nations

forces, the closing of the Straits of Tiran, and the massing of troops on Israel'snorthern and southern borders, the fiery rhetoric created a state of existential

fear in Israel.

In addition, Israel received word from France, the nation's major arms supplier,

that De Gaulle had issued a complete ban on weapons sales and transfers to

Israel. And in a June 4 meeting, the newly formed Cabinet, received a cablefrom President Johnson seeming to contradict the earlier

American softening on the issue of pre-emption. It warned that "Israel will not

be alone unless it decides to go it alone." Nevertheless, the Cabinet, in a 12-to-2

vote, opted for war, scheduled to begin early the next morning, Monday, June 5,

1967.

8/11/2019 UNHSC

15/29

DETAILED TIMELINE

Jan - March 1967

In the first quarter of 1967 there were over 270 border "incidents", mainly

emanating from Syria, which caused rising concern in Israel.

April 7th 1967

Syrian gunners fired from their Golan Heights position on an Israeli tractor

farming in the demilitarised zone. Artillery fire was exchanged and the fight

escalated. Israel sent airplanes against the Syrian gun positions and severalSyrian villages. The Syrians sent up MiG jets and an all-out dogfight ensued

Israel downed six Syrian MiG 21 fighters and chased the remainder all the way

back to Damascus.

May 13th 1967

Anwar Sadat arrives back from Moscow, primed with misinformation he gives

to Nasser that Israel is massing 10-12 brigades in preparation for an attack on

Syria, supposedly to take place May 17.

May 14th 1967Israel learns that Egyptian troops have been put on alert and begun reinforcing

units in the Sinai .

May 15th 1967

Israel responds by ordering some regular armoured units to reinforce the Sinai

front and drafted a message to ensure Egypt understood that Israel wasresponding to Egyptian actions and not massing troops on its own initiative:

Israel wants to make it clear to the government of Egypt that it has no

aggressive intentions whatsoever against any Arab state at all

May 16th 1967

Nasser demands withdrawal of 3,400 man UN Emergency Force (UNEF).

Egypt now has a further 30,000 troops to the 30-35 thousand permanently

stationed on the peninsula, plus 200 tanks, and it was continuing to pour in more

troops all the time.

May 17th 1967A series of emergency meetings was held by the Cabinet in Israel. There was

great apprehension when head of Israeli military intelligence, Major General

Aharon Yariv, reported to army headquarters, apparently mistakenly, that the

Egyptian army was equipped with poison gas (Israel was unprepared for

chemical warfare).

All Egypt is now prepared to plunge into total war which will put an end to

Israel - Cairo Radio

May 18th 1967

The Zionist barrack in Palestine is about to collapse and be destroyed. Everyone of the hundred million Arabs has been living for the past nineteen years on

8/11/2019 UNHSC

16/29

one hopeto live to see the day Israel is liquidatedThere is no life, no peace

nor hope for the gangs of Zionism to remain in the occupied land.

As of today, there no longer exists an international emergency force to protect

Israel.The sole method we shall apply against Israel is a total war which will

result in the extermination of Zionist existence. - Cairo Radios Voice of theArabs broadcastUN Secretary General U Thant sent cable to Cairo advising that UNEF would

be withdrawn. He added the rider: Irrespective of the reasons for the actions

you have taken, in all frankness, may I advise you that I have serious misgivings

about it forI believe that this Force has been an important factor in

maintaining the relative quiet in the area of its deployment during the past tenyears and that its withdrawal may have grave implications for peace.- Charles

W Yost "How it Began", Foreign Affairs, Winter 1968

The UK were deeply upset at the U Thant caving in without bringing the matter

to the UN General Assembly: It really makes a mockery of the peacekeeping

work of the United Nations if, as soon as the tension rises, the United Nations

force it told to leave. Indeed the collapse of UNEF might well have

repercussions on other United Nations peacekeeping forces, and the credibility

of the United Nations in this field are thrown into question.

UNEF was established with the full concurrence of the United Nationsany

decision to withdraw the force should be taken in the United Nations after full

consultation with all the countries involvedit should not be taken as the result

of some unilateral decision. -

George Brown (British Foreign Secretary), speaking at United NationsAssociation annual dinner in London

May 19th 1967

I do not want to cause alarm but it is difficult for me not to warn the Council

that, as I see it, the position in the Middle East is more disturbingindeed more

menacing than at any time since the fall of 1956. - UN Secretary General U

Thant, Security Council meeting. - U.N. S/7906 26th May 1967Now there are an estimated 40 thousand Egyptian troops and 500 tanks in the

Sinai. Israel ordered an immediate large-scale mobilization of reserves.

May 20th 1967Our forces are now entirely ready not only to repulse the aggression, but to

initiate the act of liberation itself, and to explode the Zionist presence in the

Arab homeland. - Syrias Defence Minister Hafez Assad (later to be Syrias

President).

Egypt and Israel faced each other directly tonight as the United Nations

Emergency Force, which had stood between them for more than ten years,began its official withdrawal.

May 22nd 1967

8/11/2019 UNHSC

17/29

Egypts President Nasser announced: The Israeli flag shall not go through the

Gulf of Aqaba. Our sovereignty over the entrance to the Gulf cannot be

disputed.

"We want a full scale, popular war of liberation to destroy the Zionist enemy"

- Syrian president Dr. Nureddin al-Attasi speech to troops"Israel today proposed a mutual reduction in troop concentrations in the MiddleEast, while its Arab neighbours laid plans to strengthen still further their forces

round her borders" - The Times

May 23rd 1967

Egypt closed the Straits of Tiran (Gulf of Aqaba) to Israeli shipping, thereby

cutting off Israels only supply route with Asia and stopping the flow of oil

from its main supplier, Iran. By international law, this was an act of war.

(Reported that day in every newspaper in the world - see report in The Times)

President Johnson tonight condemned the Arab blockade of Israel shipping in

the Gulf of Aqaba as "illegal and potentially disastrous to the cause of peace"

"The purported closing of the Gulf of Aqaba has brought a new and grave

dimension to the crisis. The United States considers the gulf to be an

international waterway." Mr Johnson condemned the "hurried withdrawal" of

the United Nations emergency force from Gaza and Sinai, and the "recent build-

up of military forces in the area". - Times May 24th 1967

May 24th 1967

Israels foreign minister Abba Eban met with UK Prime Minister HaroldWilson at 10 Downing Street. Wilson revealed that the Cabinet had met that

morning and concluded that Egypts blockade must not be allowed to triumph;

Britain would join with others in an effort to open the Straits.

May 26th 1967

Taking over Sharm el Sheikh meantconfrontation with Israel (and) also meant

that we were ready to enter a general war with Israel. The battle will be ageneral one and our basic objective will be to destroy Israel - Gamal Abdel

Nasser speech to the General Council of the International Confederation of Arab

Trade Unions -broadcast in Arabic by Cairo Radios Voice of the Arabs, GamalAbdel Nasser, 19.35 GMT, 26th May 1967 (the speech made front page news in

The Times May 27th)

May 27th 1967

Nasser cancels a planned Egyptian attack on Israel (Operation Fajr - Dawn),

planned for following day, after it became obvious that the Israelis knew about

the plan.The NY Times reported that Jordan would admit Saudi and Iraqi forces into its

country to do battle with Israel

May 28th 1967

8/11/2019 UNHSC

18/29

The existence of Israel is in itself an aggressionwhat happened in 1948 was

an aggressionan aggression against the Palestinian people (the crisis had

developed because) Eshkol threatened to march on Damascus, occupy Syria and

overthrow the Syrian regime. It was our duty to come to the aid of our Arab

brother. It was our duty to ask for the withdrawal of UNEF. When UNEF went,we had to go to the Gulf of Aqaba and restore things to what they were whenwe were in Aqaba in 1956 - Gamel Abdel Nasser at a press conference for

several hundred of the Worlds press.

We will not accept anycoexistence with Israel.Today the issue is not theestablishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel.The war with Israel

is in effect since 1948. - Gamel Abdel Nasser press conference

May 29th 1967Now, eleven years after 1956 we are restoring things to what they were in1956The issue now at hand is not the Gulf of Aqaba, the Straits of Tiran or

the withdrawal of UNEF, but the rights of the Palestinian people. - Nasser

speech to General Assembly in Cairo: - Vance, Vick, and Pierre Lauer: Hussein

of Jordan. London: Peter Owen, 1968

May 30th 1967

Jordan signed a mutual defense treaty with Egypt, thereby joining the military

alliance already in place between Egypt and Syria. Jordanian forces were given

to the command of an Egyptian General."The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of

Israel ... to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq,

Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the

world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the criticalhour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not of more

declarations." - Gamal Abdel Nasser speech

Israel called upon Jordan numerous times to refrain from hostilities. Hussein,

however, was caught on the horns of a galling dilemma: allow Jordan to be

dragged into war and face the brunt of the Israeli response, or remain neutraland risk full-scale insurrection among his own people. Army Commander-in-

Chief General Sharif Zaid Ben Shaker warned in a press conference that "If

Jordan does not join the war a civil war will erupt in Jordan".

May 31st 1967The existence of Israel is an error which must be rectified. This is our

opportunity to wipe out the ignominy which has been with us since 1948. Our

goal is clear - to wipe Israel off the map - President Aref of Iraq

June 1st 1967

Brethren and sons, this is the day of the battle to avenge our martyred brethrenwho fell in 1948. It is the day to wash away the stigma. We shall, God willing,

8/11/2019 UNHSC

19/29

meet in Tel Aviv and Haifa - Radio broadcast by Iraqi President Abdel

Rahman Aref - 11.00 GMT June 1st 1967, Baghdad Domestic Service in Arabic

, Foreign Broadcast Information Service

Those who survive will remain in Palestine. I estimate that none of them willsurvive. - Ahmed Shukairy, chairman of PLO in Jordanian Jerusalem, asked innews interview what will happen to the Israelis if there is a war.

Levi Eshkol, Prime Minister of Israel, sent message to Russian Premiere

Kosygin: "... I invited your Ambassador in Israel to visit the frontier to find out

for himself that there was no truth in this allegation. To my regret, the

Ambassador did not respond to our invitation. The Chief of Staff of the UNTSOchecked these claims and informed the Secretary-General of the UN and the

capitals of the region that there were no Israel concentrations on the Syrian

border."

June 3rd 1967

MILITARY BUILD-UP: By this time Egypt had 210,000 troops ready for

deployment, with 100,000 of them with 930 tanks ready in the Sinai. They had

30 Tu-16 Russian-made bombers, which were a threat to Israels cities. Overall

the Egyptian Air Force, by far the largest and the most modern of all the Arab

air forces, consisting of about 450 combat aircraft, all Soviet-built and relatively

new.

Syria had 63,000 troops and Jordan 55,000totalling 328,000 troops ready to

fight Israel. The Arabs had twice the number of tanks compared to Israel (2,330

against 1000) and far more combat aircraft too (682 compared to Israels 286);

They had 1,845 armoured personnel carriers compared to Israels 1,500.However, by fully mobilizing Israel could muster 250,000 men. Israel would

need to rely on the training and motivation of this largely civilian army to

counter the numeric superiority of the Arabs in manpower and weaponry.

Israels newly-appointed Defence Minister Moshe Dayan, wishing to confine

hostilities if possible to the imminent battles against Egypt, ordered the IsraeliArmy not to open a second front with Jordan in the West Bank in the event of

war. He instructed the head of the Israeli Army Central Command: You must

not do anything to entangle Israel with the Jordanians...

June 4th 1967Secret resolution passed by the Israeli Cabinet:

After hearing a report on the military and political situation from the Prime

Minister, the Foreign minister, the Defence Minister, the Chief of Staff and the

head of military intelligence the Government ascertained that the armies of

Egypt, Syria and Jordan are deployed for immediate multi-front aggression,threatening the very existence of the State. The Government resolves to take

military action in order to liberate Israel from the strangle hold of aggression

which is progressively being tightened around Israel.

8/11/2019 UNHSC

20/29

The Government authorizes the Prime Minister and the Defense Minister to

confirm to the General Staff of the IDF the time for action.

Members of the Cabinet will receive as soon as possible the information

concerning the military operation to be carried out.

The Government charges the Foreign Minister with the task of exhausting allpossibilities of political action in order to explain Israels stand and to obtain thesupport of the powers.

King Husain of Jordan today warned Britain and the United States that they

stood to lose their friends in the Arab world for ever if they fell into the Zionist

trap of supporting Israel in the present crisis.

"There are no words I can use to express my disappointment at the attitude thatthe British Government has taken with regard to the Gulf of Aqaba", he told a

crowded press conference at his palace in Amman. - The Times, June 5th 1967

p4, Nicholas Herbert, Amman "WARNING TO BRITAIN BY KING HUSAIN:

Danger of losing Arab friends"

8/11/2019 UNHSC

21/29

RECOMMENDED READING

http://mfa.gov.il/MFA/ForeignPolicy/MFADocuments/Yearbook1/Pages/19%20Statement%20to%20the%20Security%20Council%20by%20Foreign%20Mi.aspx

http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/0/7D35E1F729DF491C85256EE700686136

http://www.aljazeera.com/focus/1967-

40yearsofoccupation/2007/06/2008526113146572296.html

8/11/2019 UNHSC

22/29

Sample Position Paper

8/11/2019 UNHSC

23/29

Country:The United States of AmericaCommittee:United Nations Human Rights Council

Agenda 1:Ensuring ethical working environment in the RMG sector of Bangladesh

Promoting freedom and democracy and protecting human rights around the world are central

to U.S. foreign policy. The values captured in theUniversal Declaration of Human

Rights and in other global and regional commitments are consistent with the values upon

which the United States was founded centuries ago. The United States supports those who

long to live in freedom and under democratic governments that protect universally acceptedhuman rights. The Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor leads the U.S. efforts to

promote democracy, protecthuman rights and international religious freedom and advance

labor rights globally.

In a country like Bangladesh where the Ready Made Garments sector contributes around 76

percent to the total export earnings, it is truly disappointing to see Human Rights being

violated on such a large scale - the severity of which were exemplified in the tragedies of the

November 2012 Tazreen Fashions factory fire and the April 2013 Rana Plaza building

collapse. The United States being the largest importer of the RMG sector of Bangladesh and

as Bangladesh is the 4th largest apparel exporter in USA, the States has always been deeply

concerned about the issue.

On June 27, 2013, President Obama announced his decision to suspend Bangladeshs tradebenefits under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) in view of insufficient progress

by the Government of Bangladesh in affording Bangladeshi workers internationally

recognized worker rights. The suspension of the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP)

facilities for Bangladesh by the USA is not any stand by the US government against

Bangladesh but to press the country to address workers safety.

24 September 2013 Nearly 3.5 million garment workers in Bangladesh recently beset by

industrial accidents and a staggering loss of life got essential support to improve working

conditions, strengthen labor inspection and upgrade building and fire safety at their

workplaces, thanks to a new program in partnership with the United Nations. The Plan is

http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/2008/108544.htmhttp://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/2008/108544.htmhttp://www.state.gov/j/drl/democ/http://www.state.gov/j/drl/hr/http://www.state.gov/j/drl/irf/http://www.state.gov/j/drl/ila/index.htmhttp://www.state.gov/j/drl/ila/index.htmhttp://www.state.gov/j/drl/irf/http://www.state.gov/j/drl/hr/http://www.state.gov/j/drl/democ/http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/2008/108544.htmhttp://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/2008/108544.htm

8/11/2019 UNHSC

24/29

supported by other parallel initiatives focused on the RMG sector in Bangladesh, namely the

Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh signed by over 80 leading clothing

brands and retailers and the Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety, a binding five-year

initiative undertaken by North American apparel companies and retailers to improve safety in

more than 500 factories.

On 14 May 2013 The United Nations labor agency welcomed an agreement signed byInternational fashion brands and retailers, and trade unions to prevent workplace disasters.

The signatories to the Accord on Building and Fire Safety commit to the goal of a safe and

sustainable Bangladeshi Ready Made Garment (RMG) industry in which no worker needs to

fear fires, building collapses, or other accidents that could be prevented with reasonable

health and safety measures according to the ILO website. The companies that sign on, such as

Zara and H&M, have 45 days from the signing to develop and agree on an implementation

plan to monitor their textile production in Bangladesh. ILO stands ready to provide

appropriate support to this initiative in response to the requests of the signatory parties, to

help ensure effective implementation and coordination with national organizations.

The United States is also pleased to associate itself with the July 8, 2013 European Union

(EU)-Bangladesh-International Labor Organization (ILO) Sustainability Compact for

Continuous Improvements in Labor Rights and Factory Safety in the Ready-made Garment

and Knitwear Industry in Bangladesh. The United States Government encourages the

Government of Bangladesh to take significant actions to provide a basis for reinstating

Bangladeshs Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) benefits, by implementing

commitments under the "National Tripartite Plan of Action on Fire Safety and Structural

Integrity."

The US and Bangladesh have a common interest in ensuring growth of the exports from

Bangladesh, but not at the expense of safe and healthy working conditions or fundamental

labor rights.

References:

www.reuters.com

www.bbc.com

www.wikipedia.org

www.cnn.com

www.cia.gov

www.ilo.org

http://www.reuters.com/http://www.reuters.com/http://www.bbc.com/http://www.bbc.com/http://www.wikipedia.org/http://www.wikipedia.org/http://www.cnn.com/http://www.cnn.com/http://www.cia.gov/http://www.cia.gov/http://www.ilo.org/http://www.ilo.org/http://www.ilo.org/http://www.cia.gov/http://www.cnn.com/http://www.wikipedia.org/http://www.bbc.com/http://www.reuters.com/

8/11/2019 UNHSC

25/29

Sample Working Paper

The purpose of the Working Paper is to clearly communicate the interests of one or more countries.Please note that there is no set format for working papers; the following is just one example of apossible working paper. To facilitate the process, working papers should include the name and topic

of the committee and should list the countries which wrote the paper. Pending the approval of theDirector, working papers may be copied and distributed to the committee.

Committee: UN Conference on Trade and Development

Topic A: Generalized System of Preferences

Submitted by Bolivia, Peru, and Ecuador, Bolivia, Peru, and Ecuador believe that a GSP should be setup so that lesser-Developed Countries (LDCs) receive preferential treatment from

Developed Countries (DCs). To that end we propose:

1. Each DC reduce their tariffs to the lowest level possible. This level will be determined by the belowcreated subcommittee,

2. Bilateral trade agreements should be pursued for further reductions in tariffs.

3. Trade preferences should be granted in the following areas:

AgricultureManufacturesSemi-manufacturesRaw materials

4. Decisions on product coverage by preference giving nations be made in consultation with theaffected LDC. Annual reevaluation of coverage shall take place with the LDC with disputed going tothe below-created subcommittee.

5. A subcommittee of UNCTAD should be created with equal membership of developed anddeveloping countries. This subcommittee would have the following powers:

To mediate disputes between preference givers and receivers

Make recommendations which all countries should follow

Serve as a forum for airing grievances relating to the GSP

Report regularly to the Secretary-General

Membership should be as follows: Five permanent nations from the DCs

Five permanent nations from the LDCs and LLDCs

Ten members elected annually by UNCTAD

Voting rights will have to be worked out, but the UN format for subcommittees seems best. Of course,we are amenable to change.

Resolution Format Guide Heading

8/11/2019 UNHSC

26/29

The title should be in capital letters, above the main body of the resolution. The title consists

of a number (signifying the first or second topic area being discussed), followed by another

number (identifying the individual resolution). For example, the first draft resolution on the

first topic area discussed would be titled Draft Resolution 1.1 accordingly. The committee

Director will assign the number once the resolution has been approved.

On the left margin and two lines below the title should be:

(1) The committee name

(2) The topic addressed by the resolution, and

(3) The signatories of the resolution.

NOTE: There are no sponsors of a resolution.

Body

The resolution is written in the format of a long sentence. Just as grammatical rules make a

language more uniform in its usage, so is the resolution in its format. The resolution begins

with The General Assembly, for all GA committees and with The Economic and SocialCouncil,for all ECOSOC committees. The Regional Bodies and the Security Council use

their own names as the introductory line. The rest of the resolution consists of phrases and

clauses with the first word of each phrase/clause underlined. The next section, consisting of

Perambulatory Phrases, describes the problem being addressed, recalls past actions taken,

explains the purpose of the resolution, and offers support for the operative clauses that

follow. Each clause in the preamble begins with an underlined word and ends with a comma.

Operative Clauses are numbered and state the action to be taken by the body. These clauses

all begin with present tense active verbs, which are generally stronger words than those used

in the Preamble. Each operative clause is followed by a semi-colon except the last, which

ends with a period. Any sub-operative clauses (or sub-sub-clauses, etc,) also should end with

a semi-colon. There should be no periods in the body of the resolution.

Content

Of course, the most important characteristic of the final resolution is the content, which will

be carefully scrutinized by the Director before approval. A well-written resolution

demonstrates:

Familiarity with the problem. Relevant background information and previous United

Nations actions are included.

Recognition of the issues. Arguments on the topic are specified early. At a minimum, theresolution should address in some form all the issues listed in the Questions a Resolution

Must Answer section of the Study guide.

A clear and concise style. Every clause and phrase should have a purpose.

Good form. Each phrase and clause should follow the exact format described above.

Perambulatory PhrasesAffirmingAlarmed by

ApprovingAware of

Guided byHaving adoptedHaving consideredHaving considered furtherHaving devoted attentionHaving examined

8/11/2019 UNHSC

27/29

BelievingBearing in mindCognizant ofConfident

ContemplatingConvinced

DeclaringDeeply concernedDeeply conscious

Deeply convincedDeeply disturbed

Deeply regrettingDesiringEmphasizingExpectingExpressing its appreciation

Expressing its satisfaction

FulfillingFully awareFully alarmedFully believingFurther deploringFurther recalling

Having heardHaving receivedHaving studiedKeeping in mind

Noting furtherNoting with regret

Noting with satisfactionNoting with deep concernNoting further

Noting with approvalObserving

RealizingReaffirmingRecallingRecognizingReferring

Seeking

Taking into accountTaking noteViewing with appreciationWelcoming

Operative Clauses

AcceptsAffirmsApproves

Authorizes

Calls forCalls uponConfirmsConsiders

Declares accordinglyDeplores

Draws attentionDesignatesEmphasizesEncouragesEndorses

Expresses its appreciation

Expresses its hopeFurther invitesFurther proclaims

Further remindsFurther recommendsFurther requestsFurther resolvesHas resolved

Notes

ProclaimsReaffirmsRecommendsReminds

RegretsRequests

ResolvesSolemnly affirmsStrongly condemnsSupportsTakes note of

Trusts

Urges

Sample Resolution

DRAFT RESOLUTION 1.1

Committee: Commission on Information Regulation

Topic: International News flow Imbalance

8/11/2019 UNHSC

28/29

The Economic and Social Council,

Recalling its Resolution A/36/89 of 16 December 1981, The Declaration on Fundamental PrinciplesConcerning the Contribution of the Mass Media to Strengthening Peace and InternationalUnderstanding,

Further recalling Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Everyone has the rightto...receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers,

Recognizing that the problem of news flow imbalance is that two-way information among countriesof a region is either nonexistent or insufficient and information exchanged between regions of theworld is inadequate,

Realizing the need for all sovereign nations to maintain their integrity and still play an active role inthe international system,

1. Recommends that a three-level information interchange system be established on the national,regional, and international levels to ameliorate the current problems of news flow imbalance, to

operate as follows:

Each regions member nations will report their national information and receive the

information of other nations in their region from the regional level of this interchange system;

Nations will decide the character of the news flow media best suited to the need of theirsovereign territory, be this printed, audio, or audio-visual;

Regional News Gathering Agencies will serve to gather information from the nations in theirregion, and these boards will have no editorial discretion and will serve to forward allinformation to the International Board;

Each regional agency will be composed of representatives from every member nation of thenation of the region;

The primary function of the International Board will be to translate information accumulatedfrom the regional news gathering agencies;

The secondary purpose will be to transmit all information gathered back to the member

nations via the regional news gathering agencies;

In order to expedite the transfer of information from the international to regional level the

international board will utilize a UN frequency on a European Economic Communitysatellite;

2. Urges the establishment of the University of International Communications, which will be based inGeneva, Switzerland, with the following aims:

The University and branches will be established with the express purpose of bringing together

world views and facilitating the transfer of technology; All member nations of the United Nations will be equally represented at the University;

Incentives will be offered to students of journalism and communications at the University to

return to their countries to teach upon completion of instruction;

The instructors of the regional education centers will be comprised of a multi-partisancoalition of educators from throughout the world;

3. Calls for the continued use of funds from the International Program for the Development ofCommunications, Special Account, The United National Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization (UNESCO), the UN Development Programme, and other sources of funding includingnational governments and private donors;4. Recommends that the distribution of funds be decided by the International Programme for the

development of Communication (IPDC).

8/11/2019 UNHSC

29/29